Kyle Rittenhouse - guilty or not guilty?

[zh cohen]

Were they assaulting him or using necessary force to prevent him from murdering another unarmed man?

Who was Rittenhouse threatening when they started chasing him?

[as2]

Were they assaulting him or using necessary force to prevent him from murdering another unarmed man? The way things are worded is important. 

I do not know. Seemed like many people here (Possibly Rittenhouse too) were action on emotion too. Gaige testified that all he heard from Kyle that night was "Anyone need medical" yet he was on tape calling him a "f***ing stooge". I'm going to guess anyone involved in a past curfew, protest/looting/rioting situation is in it for a little more than just what they lead on.

[as2]

Who was Rittenhouse threatening when they started chasing him?

Gaige specifically is on tape drawing his gun and running after a mob that is chasing Kyle. From my understanding, Kyle was running from the mob when all this took place, but I'm trying to find footage that brakes it down in a way my smooth brain can comprehend.

[CountValentine]

Who was Rittenhouse threatening when they started chasing him?

You mean after he shot an unarmed in cold blood for throwing a plastic bag at him?

[CountValentine]

I'm going to guess anyone involved in a past curfew, protest/looting/rioting situation is in it for a little more than just what they lead on.

Exactly. We now have two dead and some think it is all one sides fault.

There is a lot of blame going around but only one person killed two others.

[as2]

You mean after he shot an unarmed in cold blood for throwing a plastic bag at him?

Wow, sounds like you have your mind made up here already. Link to video footage?

Exactly. We now have two dead and some think it is all one sides fault.

There is a lot of blame going around but only one person killed two others.

Maybe, but if I decide I want to kill you, and you pull a gun on me, and I kill you, I'm still legally in the right regardless of previous intent.

[CountValentine]

Wow, sounds like you have your mind made up here already. Link to video footage?

I am showing you how you can look at the exact same situation both ways. I look at it from I don't know if it was an assault or trying to stop a murderer.

Your post shows you have your mind made up it was an assault, no?

From what I'm seeing, at least one of the the 2 previous individuals physically assaulted him with what I believe was a skateboard.

[aygart]

You mean after he shot an unarmed in cold blood for throwing a plastic bag at him?

Is that established fact?

[CountValentine]

Is that established fact?

No and...

I am showing you how you can look at the exact same situation both ways. I look at it from I don't know if it was an assault or trying to stop a murderer.

[as2]

I am showing you how you can look at the exact same situation both ways. I look at it from I don't know if it was an assault or trying to stop a murderer.

Your post shows you have your mind made up it was an assault, no?

Stating that he shot an unarmed individual for throwing a plastic bottle or whatever at him, is very different than calling an attack (in self defense, or to do harm) an assault. One is making up facts, the other is stating the facts we have, while (admittedly) possibly omitting further facts. I also specifically stated multiple times that I don't know more than this isolated part of the encounter, as well as what bearing this isolated encounter will have on the trial. I specifically articulated that so it should NOT be construed as being something it isn't. I do, on the other hand, have no issue stating that I think the individuals who were shot, deserving or not, were scum. And the world is a much better place without one of them particularly. That has ZERO to do with this particular encounter, or the legality of it though.

[zh cohen]

You mean after he shot an unarmed in cold blood for tryi g to grab his gun from him?

FTFY

[zh cohen]

I look at it from I don't know if it was an assault or trying to stop a murderer.

So if you don't know (even with the benefit of hindsight) then that means it would have been reasonable for Rittenhouse to think (in the moment) that it was an assault, right?

[CountValentine]

So if you don't know (even with the benefit of hindsight) then that means it would have been reasonable for Rittenhouse to think (in the moment) that it was an assault, right?

That is one side. The other side it would of been reasonable for Kyle to believe they were trying to stop him from shooting another unarmed man.

I am referring to the second person shot.

[CountValentine]

Stating that he shot an unarmed individual for throwing a plastic bottle or whatever at him, is very different than calling an attack (in self defense, or to do harm) an assault. One is making up facts, the other is stating the facts we have, while (admittedly) possibly omitting further facts. I also specifically stated multiple times that I don't know more than this isolated part of the encounter, as well as what bearing this isolated encounter will have on the trial. I specifically articulated that so it should NOT be construed as being something it isn't. I do, on the other hand, have no issue stating that I think the individuals who were shot, deserving or not, were scum. And the world is a much better place without one of them particularly. That has ZERO to do with this particular encounter, or the legality of it though.

My fault as I mixed up posts.

I am talking about the skateboard which you called an assault. Some will look at it as using necessary force to stop Kyle from killing again.

[as2]

My fault as I mixed up posts.

I am talking about the skateboard which you called an assault. Some will look at it as using necessary force to stop Kyle from killing again.

I acknowledged that. While the connotation may seem negative, it was an assault, regardless of what the reasoning was. I would definitely use the term "attack" or "assault" in the case of self defense. Either way, a mis-portrayal is still very different than making up facts.


Additionally, like you pointed out earlier, regardless of what these individuals think they were doing, it's what a reasonable individual would do, that actually matters. So if Rittenhouse, or any of the 3 people shot were genuinely acting in what THEY believed was self defense, it makes no difference if in fact they were not. Being that Rittenhouse was the only one without a violent past, I think it sets a bit of a precedence, but I still want to see facts. 

[CountValentine]

I acknowledged that. While the connotation may seem negative, it was an assault, regardless of what the reasoning was. I would definitely use the term "attack" or "assault" in the case of self defense. Either way, a mis-portrayal is still very different than making up facts.

I am looking at a situation from both sides. That is not making up facts. That is trying to get to the facts.
In question was the person with the skateboard attacking the person or was was he using necessary force to stop another killing.

[as2]

I am looking at a situation from both sides. That is not making up facts. That is trying to get to the facts.
In question was the person with the skateboard attacking the person or was was he using necessary force to stop another killing.

I understand that, and I respect it. We should all look at it from both sides. I don't believe we have a definitive answer yet as to what the acts of the skateboard user, and gun user, can be classified as. If that info has come out, I haven't seen it yet. I'm pretty sure my comments about making up facts were relating to something you have already corrected yourself on, and if that is so, I take it back.

[CountValentine]

Is the skateboard guy the second person killed, Anthony Huber?

[as2]

Is the skateboard guy the second person killed, Anthony Huber?

I think so. Not certain though.

[zh cohen]

Is the skateboard guy the second person killed, Anthony Huber?

Yes.